The United States' Withdrawal from International Court of Justice Jurisdiction in Consular Cases: Reasons and Consequences
![handle is hein.journals/djcil19 and id is 267 raw text is: THE UNITED STATES' WITHDRAWAL FROM
INTERNATIONAL COURT OF JUSTICE
JURISDICTION IN CONSULAR CASES:
REASONS AND CONSEQUENCES
JOHN QUIGLEY*
INTRODUCTION
In 2005, the United States withdrew from the Optional Protocol
to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations Concerning the
Compulsory Settlement of Disputes. The Optional Protocol provides
for jurisdiction in the International Court of Justice (ICJ) when any
state party to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations
(VCCR)1 seeks to sue another state party for violating it.2
Controversy over VCCR Article 36, which allows a foreign
national under arrest to contact a home state consul, prompted the
withdrawal. The United States had just lost two cases in the ICJ
arising out of situations in which police in the United States had failed
to observe consular access for arrested foreign nationals. The
withdrawal was a response to those ICJ decisions.
The withdrawal raised questions about the intent of the United
States to comply with its obligations under the VCCR. For a number
of years, the United States has taken a view of the consequences of
non-compliance with VCCR Article 36 that is at odds with the views
of other states party to the VCCR. The United States reads VCCR
Article 36 as affording less protection for a foreign national whose
consular access was not respected than do other states.
Many view the withdrawal as a significant reversal of U.S. policy
regarding U.S. participation in international dispute resolution
Copyright © 2009 by John Quigley.
* President's Club Professor in Law, Michael E. Moritz College of Law, The Ohio State
University. The author is grateful to Professor Annecoos Wiersema for comments on a draft.
1. Vienna Convention on Consular Relations, Apr. 24, 1963, 21 U.S.T. 77, 596 U.N.T.S.
261 [hereinafter VCCR].
2. Optional Protocol to the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations Concerning the
Compulsory Settlement of Disputes, Apr. 24, 1963, 21 U.S.T. 325, 326, 596 U.N.T.S. 487, 488
[hereinafter Optional Protocol].](ViewImageLocal?handle=hein.journals/djcil19&div=12&collection=&method=preview&ext=.png&size=3)
What Is HeinOnline?
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most
The United States' Withdrawal from International Court of Justice Jurisdiction in Consular Cases: Reasons and Consequences
Contact us for annual subscription options:
Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?
profiles profiles most